Legal Opinion · Dissent

Yeoman v. Brown

United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims

Decided February 24, 1997No. 95-851Published

1DissentSteinberg, Judge

I voted to grant the motion for panel review because I believe that the outcome in this case is reasonably debatable and should be decided by a panel.1 The appellant has raised, through counsel, substantive issues of first impression, including the appropriateness of the use of Iowa state law by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA or Board) in finding that the injuries he sustained in a motor vehicle accident on November 3, 1990, were the result of his own “willful misconduct” under 38 C.F.R. § 3.1(n) (1996).

The Board grounded its July 1995 decision on two separate and independent bases for…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Frankel v. DerwinskiUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 1990
  2. Thurber v. BrownUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 1993
  3. Guardian Federal Savings and Loan Association v. Federal Savings and Loan Insurance CorporationCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1978
  4. Bethea v. DerwinskiUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 1992
  5. Fugere v. DerwinskiUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 1990

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API